On 01/23/2016 06:20 PM, Alice Wonder wrote:
Sometimes the direction of UI development in gnome really angers me.
I'll have to be one who has to say that I really am not bothered by
GNOME 3. It is better out of the box than GNOME 2 ever was, at least in
my opinion, especially that abomination called Nautilus spatial mode.
It is a bit irritating that things are either really easy or nearly
impossible to do, with very little in the middle that are just a bit
hard to do when it comes to desktop customization, but, you know, I've
not been one to make things too custom. But as far as I'm concerned the
Trinity DE is where I'm most comfortable (TDE being, of course, a
continuation of KDE 3.x). Yes, there are some packages I can install,
but it hasn't been a major deal for me to make it 'just like what I'm
used to.'
But no environment is perfect; I've used fvwm, lxde, xfce, cde, Apollo
DomainOS pads, the UnixPC Office, raw X11 with twm, kde 1,2,3 and 4, and
gnome 2 and 3; the only modern DE I really don't like is Unity. But for
the rest; well, no real strong preferences. As long as I can start
applications and lots of terminals and get some basic status stuff from
my DE I'm pretty happy. And GNOME 3 is light years ahead of where we
were back in the Bluecurve days, at least with local displays. Remote
is a different ball of wax, at least with GNOME 3.
I use, and am happy with, CentOS 7 on the both desktop and the server,
especially now that I've rolled out enough servers to get used to the
way C7 does things. Multiple NICs and static IPs are not a problem, and
the new installer makes everything easier to get to, even if some
things, like setting up RAID and LVM together, are a bit differently set
up and are done in a different way than before. Much better than the
windows-style 'wizard,' reminiscent of InstallShield, of before.
There are of course corner cases, but my requirements thus far have been
met very well with no real problems. The new systemctl way took me all
of five minutes to like better than the 'service'/'chkconfig' pair, and
so far things seem as stable as C6 on the same hardware.
Yes, it is different, and I know some folks equate 'different' and
'change' with 'being worse.' I think different just means different,
and it is a separate judgment whether something is better or is worse.
Or just different.
For example, when selecting a font for the gedit text editor - there
is no way to ask it to only show monospace fonts.
It's a fricken text editor, that should be the default - meaning you
have to do something special to get fonts shown that aren't monospace.
Why? Why is it automatic that a text editor should be automatically
monospace? (Sure, I use gedit with a monospace font, but that doesn't
mean it's not useful with a proportional font).
What I want is a knob in Thunderbird to keep the message font from going
microscopic even though I have set a minimum font..... but that's
something I need to take up with upstream, since it is CentOS' stated
goal to be functionally equivalent to upstream EL.
To get a 'use monospace font list only in gedit' you should really talk
to or file a bug report with upstream.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
